Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T08:13:12.735Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Microstructure and Chemical Bonding on the Adhesion Strength of a Silicon/Polymer Interface for Microelectronic Packaging Applications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

Dimitrios Pantelidis ,
Hoo-Jeong Lee  and
John C. Bravman
Dimitrios Pantelidis
Affiliation:
Materials Science & Engineering Department, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
Hoo-Jeong Lee
Affiliation:
Materials Science & Engineering Department, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
John C. Bravman
Affiliation:
Materials Science & Engineering Department, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
Get access

Abstract

Interface reinforcement brought about by addition of a γ-amino-propyl-triethoxy-silane (γ-APS) adhesion promoter layer between a silicon wafer and a spun-on benzocyclobutene polymer (BCB) is investigated. Combining cross-sectional TEM and XPS, crack growth is shown to occur along the γ-APS/BCB interface. Ion etching and in-situ XPS are further employed to study chain orientation and chemical bonding variations through the silane layer. A tendency of the amide group to orient away from the wafer is documented and Si-O-Si siloxane bonding at the γ- APS/SiO2 interface is hypothesized as an important mechanism for adhesion strength enhancement.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 535: Symposium D/I – III-V and IV-IV Materials & Processing Challenges for Highly… , 1998 , 165
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. “Microelectronics Packaging Handbook, ”ed. by Tummala, R. R., Rymaszewski, E. J., and Klopfenstein, A. G., Chapman & Hall, c1997, v. II, pp.509–613.Google Scholar
2. Strandjord, A. J. G., Rogers, W. B., Ida, Y., DeVellis, R. R., Shiau, S., Moyer, E. S., Scheck, D. M., and Garrou, P. E., “Photosensitive Benzocyclobutene for Stress-Buffer and Passivation Applications,” Proceedings of 47th Electronic Components and Technology Conference, (1997) p. 1260–8.Google Scholar
3. Plueddemann, E. P., Clark, H. A., Nelson, L. E., and Hoffmann, K. R., Mod. Plast. 39, 136 (1962).Google Scholar
4. Sung, N. H., Kaul, A., Chin, I. and Sung, C. S. P., Polymer Engng Sci. 22, 637 (1982).Google Scholar
5. Plueddemann, E. P., “Silane Coupling Agents,” 2nd ed. (New York: Plenum Press, c 1991), pp. 115–151.Google Scholar
6. Ishida, H., “Controlled interphases in glass fiber and particulate reinforced polymers: Structure of silane coupling agents in solutions and on substrates,” in “The interfacial interactions in polymeric composites,” ed. by Akovali, Guneri, Kluwer Academic, c 1993.Google Scholar
7. Kook, S.-Y., Snodgrass, J. M., Kirtikar, A., and Dauskardt, R.H., “Adhesion and reliability of polymer/inorganic interfaces,” submitted to Journal of Electronic Packaging, July 1998.Google Scholar
8. Plueddemann, E. P., “Silane Coupling Agents,” 2nd ed. (New York: Plenum Press, c 1991), pp. 55–78.Google Scholar
9. Plueddemann, E. P., Stark, G. L., “Catalytic and electrostatic effects in bonding through silanes,” Proceedings of 28th Annual Technical Conference, Reinforced Plastics/Composites Institute, The Society of the Plastics Industry Inc., (1973), Section 21-E, p. 1–12.Google Scholar